Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Past hour
  2. Hey all I've been shooting Inon Z-330 for some years now (from 2018), but now I started to contemplate about upgrading to bigger, more powerful strobes with warmer and more even light. Don't get me wrong, I'm super happy with Inons, they've been reliable all these years and are generally powerful enough for my use. I've also done some very beautiful (in my opinion, of course) photos with them, you can check some of them on my FB profile. But what bothers me are these two things: Lots of backscatter on the edges of the frame. I always pull the strobes well behind the housing and point them outwards, but this means that I have to crank them up to get enough light in the middle of the picture frame. I'm kind of under impression that strobes with circular flash tube don't have this problem, or at least is not so pronounced, since the light is more even across the beam range, so you don't have to crank them up that much to get enough light to the edges of the light cone. Somewhat cool temperature of light, even if I use 4600K diffusers. This is noticable mostly if I have to push the strobes hard when shooting with a sunball in the picture frame. My understanding is that if I push flash tubes hard, they will emit cooler light than with regular settings. For example take a look at the attached photo below. Strobes were set to approx. -1 or maybe -1/2, I used 4600K diffusers, but the diver's skin looks kind of blueish I've already done my homework and checked multiple reviews (Reef Photo comparison of strobes, Retra's flashgun light comparison, Adam's video about light quality, etc.) and it all seems nice and pretty straightforward that I should upgrade. But before I spend 4000€ on a new lighting system, just to find out that I didn't gain anything major, I wanted to open a discussion here on what are your thoughts about this. My main questions / talking points for you are: Are my assumptions above correct and will these issues be resolved if I move to bigger strobes with a circular flash tubes? Did you do a similar migration and did you see any noticeable difference in the quality of your photos? Would a better diffuser for Inon Z-330 resolve this problem with much less money spent? Basically I'm deciding between Retra Flash Pro X and OneUW 160x. Retra is cheaper, offers more accessories, and by buying it I support my fellow countrymen, but has a really slow recharge time, especially without superchargers, which are a non-negligible additional cost. OneUW on the other hand seems an embodiment of power and warmth (4600K), beautiful design, but is a bit more expensive (but not that much if you consider Retra Pro X + supercharger) and I'm kind of afraid that the support may be worse. Just a hunch, since I don't often hear anything about them, such as new accessories released, strobe upgrade, etc. Which one would you choose?
  3. Today
  4. What you're seeing are some of the effects of refraction. Basically, because the speed of light in water, glass and air are different, when light rays pass the boundary between different materials at an angle, they bend and scatter, resulting in optical distortions and loss of sharpness. You can't easily see the distortion when shooting natural life, but if you take a photo of something like pool tiles underwater, it will be quite plain. When shooting through a flat port, the further away from the center frame you go, the greater the angle at which the light passes through the port glass becomes, the greater is this effect going to be. Dome ports counteract this to a degree, although they introduce their own issues. They fix the distortion, but corner sharpness remains an issue, although it can be countered to a degree by closing down the aperture. I've done some testing in a pool with SeaFrogs 4-inch, 6-inch and 8-inch domes and 16-50mm and 10-18mm lenses on my A6300 camera; you can see the results here: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AupWSggdlFYKjtRFXM2KS9gqFcyRpQ?e=0mJLGM Another option would be to replace the basic flat port (which, I presume, you're using) with the threaded short macro and use a wet lens such as Fantasea/AOI UWL-09 or a Nauticam WWL-1 (not WWL-1B or WWL-C; those will not fit the SeaFrogs port). This generally provides better corner sharpness than a dome port, although I don't have any sample images to post.
  5. I have been using my sony A6500 for a few years and generally I like the camera, but I can never seem to get sharpness past the center of the image. I am currently using the sea frogs saltline with the macro port and a 16-50mm sony kit lens. Images are sharp and crisp above water, but underwater the edges are blurry. Is this solely related to using flat port? The turtle picture is F10, ISO 200 1/160 The crocodile picture is F5.6 ISO 500 1/320 Any help is appreciated!
  6. Hello! Aaron here from the US. Currently using a sony A6500, but disappointed in my image sharpness so hoping to make a post and get some answers soon!
  7. If you want to solder I would suggest buying the batteries with the tabs already attached. That way you solder the tabs and not the batteries. Heating the batteries enough to get a good solder connection can damage them. I believe Amazon sells the same batteries I used with the tabs already attached.
  8. Morning Guys, Been here for a little while and thought I better get moving. My name Is Dave. I'm from Australia and live on the Gold Coast. I have been diving for a few years and decided to start with underwater photography. My first system was the super awesome Tg-6 lol. Great starting camera without a doubt. Still is, I think. Since then, I moved up to a Nikon Z50 with a Nauticom Housing. Hope to get lots of info and finally get to post and respond in this great community,
  9. Would like to know if anyone has figured out about how much video time one can get on a standard Sony -A1 battery if it is fully charged
  10. Yesterday
  11. The TG6 is in a PT059 housing and using the Olympus UFL3 strobe. The camera is set to RC under Strobe and WB set to auto but the strobe only fires Intermittently. The strobe is on RC A. I am using Aperature mode. 0n shore the strobe fires every time but at depth it is intermittent. This hapens irrespective of the camera settings for F/Stop and EC level. The images are either completely black or just very underexposed. Histograms are stacked to the left only. I changed the sync cable and same thing hapens. I checked the cables and both are emmiting a signal from the camera flash. At depth the strobe does not fire all of the time. However on land it works every time? If I switch both camera and strobe settings to Full and Manual then it fires every time. At surface the LCD screen is bright and clear but at depth the lcd screen is very dark even though LIVE VIEW BOOST is set to on. I can't see the subject clearly. Not sure if this is related but when trying ambient light shots and then trying to set the white balance level at depth I press the info button and when I press the shutter I get a message saying " WB levels are extreme. Continue? With the Yes/No options. This doesn't happen at the surface. IF I take the yes then the scren becomes very bright and pink and photos are obviously overexposed with pink colour. Can both these issues be a presure/depth related issue? I do not know if the issue is in the camera or the strobe. Any ideas ? Any ideas?
  12. You can solder the tabs on, but it is not very pretty, at least when I did it. I rebuilt 3 or 4 batteries years ago, and if I knew about availability of spot welders, I would have bought one. The soldered battery packs worked just fine, no issues with them for the couple of years I used them.
  13. Items 6) Seacam S45 degree viewfinder and 7) Seacam D800 housing sold
  14. appreciate your writeup as i am about to embark on this process myself. instead of a welder, can you solder to attach the tabs?
  15. we fly in and out of Bonaire every 2 months. Never had a carry on checked for size/dimensions, nor weight. This is on AA, Delta, United. most of our flights are on AA, tho
  16. i use CC attached to my paypal and feel like its double protection, but admitedly, never tested the waters as i've been lucky enough not to be scammed
  17. hi, just a brief intro. hoping to buy some gear. new to u/w photog. need 2 strobes from y canon 7d mk ii
  18. I remember your earlier posts, when you first got the 230mm dome and were displeased about the size. I have simply refused to even consider dealing with it and that was a big factor in going with DX instead of FX when I was ready to upsize from M43. I was surprised that even my primary retailer of dive photo stuff discouraged me from going with full frame, even though that meant less money for them. Although I am happy with my 8-15 or 10-17 in a small domes, there are times I don't want fisheye, and using any wide angle zoom in a 170 or 18o dome invoIves some serious compromises, so I seriously considered getting a WACP-1 last year, going so far as to buy a clean used lens compatible with the WACP, and putting the wacp in my online "shopping cart" several times. After experimenting with how I would transport it safely and what its weight would do to my carry on allowance, I concluded that I just would not be happy trying to transport a 200mm wide, 10lb lens. I also totaled up the weight of camera, housing, arms, strobes and wacp and realized it would be unpleasant carrying that to and from boats or down to the shoreline, and that I would be "that guy" to the boat crews who hand it down to me and take back for each dive. I abandoned the idea. However, the new WACP-C is only 170mm, about the same diameter as the dome I now have, and it only weighs about a pound more than the dome. I can fit it in my carry-on bags. As far as the 130 degree angle of view, you can get some sense from a chart here https://www.nikonians.org/reviews/fov-tables and here https://www.scubapix.com/blog/wacp-wide-angle-conversion-port-explained/ Short answer, though is that a 14mm lens in a dome is about 115 degrees, so 130 is wider. I will need to let someone with a better grasp of geometry provide more detail on comparing diagonal field of view. The wacp port chart shows that you can use the 24-70, and a Nikkor 28-75 but not throughout their entire zoom range, and you can also use a Sony lens with an adapter. I don't know much about lenses for the Z cameras, so cannot add more on that.
  19. I’ll have the 28-75 with WACP-1 on a Z9 next week. Hoping to get out to the southern Great Barrier Reef in October and will let you know how it performs. It doesn’t have the same zoom through (the Nikon gives 28 - 48mm) as the Sony that Chris mentioned however it’s native and faster. Im curious to know how the 28-60 Sony goes on the megadap adapter, I haven’t found any info on it but that could open up the possibility of WWL for weight / cost saving option.
  20. the lens of choice seems to be the Sony 28-70 f3.4-4.5 lens with an adapter as it's the only one that gives you full zoom range. It is equivalent in field of view approx to a 10-25 rectilinear. the WACP-1 port chart is here: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bEtIGoZh1XAzrwolt9JNcUQ2_-XIygWh/view You can also consider the new WACP-C with the same lens and it is lighter and cheaper than a WACP-1. There is a seperate thread on the WACP-C. Of course if you really want to save weight and size you could go for a fisheye lens in a 140mm Nauticam port which should have similar image quality to a WACP in a lighter, cheaper , smaller package with a lot more barrel distortion of course. You would only really consider that option for reef scenics and CFWA, not so good for pelagics and wrecks for example.
  21. @Matt Sullivan Am I really going to disagree with you here? (maybe just a little a bit...) Also owning both and diving both, I think there is a difference between these two, but it's not super evident where you might notice this. For me, it's fairly evident when shooting larger subjects, like people or larger pelagics. It's a subtle difference, but it's there (at least to my eyes). Having said this, I'll travel with the WWL-1B often, however I only drag along the WACP-1 for special occasions.
  22. Please feel free to critique my latest video. Flores and Banda in Sept 2022
  23. Last week
  24. Selling for $900 Selling Canon EF 100mm f/2.8L Macro IS USM Lens. Used only a handful of times. Retails for $1300.00Key FeaturesEF-Mount Lens/Full-Frame FormatAperture Range: f/2.8 to f/32One Ultra-Low Dispersion ElementSuper Spectra Coating1:1 Magnification, 11.8" Min. FocusRing-Type Ultrasonic Motor AF SystemFocus Range LimiterOptical Image StabilizerWeather-Sealed ConstructionRounded 9-Blade Diaphragm
  25. For Sale $900 Selling Canon EF Wide-Angle Zoom 8-15mm F/4.0 Used only a handful of times. Retails for $1300.00Product HighlightsFocal Length & Maximum Aperture: 15mm 4.0Lens Construction: 14 elements in 11 groupsDiagonal Angle of View: 180°Closest Focusing Distance: 0.16m / 6.2 in.
  26. having owned and shot the wacp-1 and shot the wwl-1 for several months, if a lens could use both options, I'd not even consider the wacp-1 considering both size and price. I personally haven't seen anything compelling about the wacp over the wwl in terms of image quality, looking at images of mine side by side from both, good luck finding a difference. Perhaps wide open there is an advantage for the WACP but realistically, how often are the majority of us shooting wide angle at apertures that wide? This is not to dump on the WACP, it is a phenomenal optic, but is it worth 4 times the price of the wwl...well...
  1. Load more activity

Sponsors

Advertisements



  • Newsletter

    Want to keep up to date with all our latest news and information?
    Sign Up
×
×
  • Create New...